"nowhere man"
Hard Day's Night 
"he's a real nowhere man, sitting in his nowhere land..."
Posts: 7
|
Post by "nowhere man" on Oct 21, 2004 13:01:18 GMT -5
I actually mean this more as a question than a criticism of PID. I probably would be in the PID camp if it wasn't for the simple question "How did they do it?" Yeah I know that Paul supposedly died and was replaced, but the specifics don't seem to add up. I mean say if Paul did die in a car crash and the other Beatles were called as was the ambulence and the police. Paul's body was probably sent to a morgue afterward. Now I understand at this time the Beatles were big, but big enough to bribe the police (not just to keep quiet, but to order Paul's friends and family to keep quiet, also the friends and family of "lovely rita"), doctors, funeral home owners and staff, and reporters to keep quiet for for nearly forty years? Also covering up the death of a bandmate doesn't really seem like the nicest thing to do.
This basic complaint is my main reason why I'm not in the PID camp, though I remember hearing some time ago that Paul did die but not in a car crash but was murdered by a hate group that kidnapped him. Has anyone else heard this same theory?
|
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 21, 2004 14:27:08 GMT -5
And not just those, but also the replacement's friends and family.
It would have been too easy for someone to leak everything if they had desired. Put yourself in the shoes of one of the Beatles or a close friend or associate of Paul.
You get a typewriter, or in later years, a word processor. You simply type out what happened in detail such as:
1. Date Paul died
2. Where Paul is buried
3. The actual name of the replacement
4. The place the replacement came from
5. School replacement attended
6. Place where replacement worked
7. Details of Paul's death
8. When and where the plastic surgeries were performed
9. The name of the doctor who did the surgeries
10. Who sang which songs after Paul's death
11. Who wrote Paul's songs
12. The names of the people who organized the cover-up
This letter could be sent to radio stations, universities, underground newspapers, major media outlets and any anti-establishment groups along with any photos or other documentation. Naturally, you would not sign your name so that the "powers that be" would not know who sent it. The "powers that be" could not kill everybody involved, which would have been hundreds of people.
This would be much more efficient than putting a lot of vague clues in your songs and on album covers which are much more traceable to the one who wrote the song or designed the album cover. Such a letter with documentation would be verifiable and give people some hard information that could be investigated by reporters and/or private investigators.
In addition, you would figure there would be death bed confessions by people with nothing to lose and people selling stories to tabloids for great deals of money. The bottom line is it would have been leaked.
|
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Oct 21, 2004 15:07:38 GMT -5
....The bottom line is it would have been leaked. ....it was. |
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 21, 2004 15:51:34 GMT -5
sigh, no it wasn't.
There were a bunch of made up "clues" that turned into a story over time. The "clues" are open to interpretation. Then there are photo comparisons that some think show a difference.
Where is the leak of the actual story.
How did he die? In a car crash, kidnapped, explosive diahrea?
When did he die? November 9th, September 11th, September 12th, 1966, January 1967? Was it "stupid bloody Teusday", or "Wednesday morning at 5:00?"
Who did it? Was it an accident while watching "lovely Rita", or the KKK, or MI5 or the illuminati?
It's hard to say the story was leaked when the story changes depending on what site you visit and how different people interpret different "clues." Can you say the actual story has leaked because someone thinks he hears "turn me on dead man" when playing a record backwards or someone sees a walrus when holding a mirror at an odd angle on a record album cover? You have a bunch of different stories and since only one can be right, then most are wrong. And if most are wrong then they can all be wrong. There has been no definitive story leaked; just a bunch of bits of information from obscure "clues" that can be interpreted many different ways, and most of which were made up by college kids and radio jocks.
Well, then, some say the clues are not important because they were put out there for misinformation to distract people from examining photos. So now we have photo comparisions and fades. That is not a leak; that's just looking at pictures that were already in the public domain.
The only thing we have that could be called a leak of a definite story is the 60IF document. There at least we have dates and details of the death and so forth. But do we believe that? Where is this document? Why have we not even seen a picture of it?
The point is that there has been no leak of the actual story with hard facts that can be investigated. That could have easily been done had somebody wanted to. All we have is interpretation of "clues" that some think indicate that Paul is dead. Beyond that, there is nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Oct 21, 2004 17:23:33 GMT -5
I submit you have NO way of knowing whether or not this is true...
|
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Oct 21, 2004 21:51:37 GMT -5
Nowhere Man, all valid points, and I can only sum it up like this: The individual Beatles themselves as the engineers doesn't make much sense, somehow this was "taken out of their hands" very early in the process. (the only thing that does make sense) How was it done? No idea, but it was.
|
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Oct 21, 2004 22:58:29 GMT -5
. I mean say if Paul did die in a car crash and the other Beatles were called as was the ambulence and the police. Paul's body was probably sent to a morgue afterward. My guess is that he was messed up beyond recognision. If there were any witnesses to the recovery of the body, they couldn't have been sure who it was. And stories are kept out of the news, either temporarily kept quiet, or permanently buried all the time. Now probably more than ever. Now I understand at this time the Beatles were big, but big enough to bribe the police (not just to keep quiet, but to order Paul's friends and family to keep quiet, also the friends and family of "lovely rita"), doctors, funeral home owners and staff, and reporters to keep quiet for for nearly forty years? Also covering up the death of a bandmate doesn't really seem like the nicest thing to do. First, I think this scheme was probably intended to be a temporary thing & the truth would eventually come out. This would be easier for the other 3 to agree to, but this was very quicky taken out of their control. This basic complaint is my main reason why I'm not in the PID camp, though I remember hearing some time ago that Paul did die but not in a car crash but was murdered by a hate group that kidnapped him. Has anyone else heard this same theory? That's getting off on the more conspiracy heavy theories over at 60IF. |
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Oct 21, 2004 23:07:40 GMT -5
sigh, no it wasn't. Where is the leak of the actual story. How did he die? In a car crash, kidnapped, explosive diahrea? An accidental car wreck. SIGH... yes it was leaked. I'm lisytening to one of the first leaks right now. The DJ was immediatly fired. Go to commercial & poof... there's a new DJ! PID is not mentioned again. There are also several accounts of this in printed articles & such. Etc Etc. Beyond that, there is nothing. Unbelievable. Nothing? The obvious differences in appearance & voice & mannerisms, & talent etc etc are nothing. Well whatever......................................... |
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 8:11:29 GMT -5
An accidental car wreck. SIGH... yes it was leaked. I'm listening to one of the first leaks right now. The DJ was immediatly fired. Go to commercial & poof... there's a new DJ! PID is not mentioned again. There are also several accounts of this in printed articles & such. Etc Etc. I would like to hear this. Where did the leak come from? What articles? What was the name of the DJ? What radio station? What was the date of the broadcast? He died in an accidental car wreck. Kind of vague and skimpy on details. Unbelievable. Nothing? The obvious differences in appearance & voice & mannerisms, & talent etc etc are nothing. Well whatever......................................... We were talking of leaks. Differences in appearance and voice are observations, it is not from a leak. I have never heard of an source of the PID story other than "clues" from songs or album covers. |
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 8:22:50 GMT -5
I submit you have NO way of knowing whether or not this is true... Where is it then? What is the definitive story answering the questions above? Where are the books about it based on an actual document rather than vague clues? Where is the document? Here is the origin: "Illinois University's student newspaper, the Northern Star, ran an article in the September 23, 1969, edition entitled "Clues Hint at Possible Beatle Death". The earliest piece, however, was by Tim Harper, whose article appeared in the college newspaper of Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, on September 17, 1969. Once the rumor became widespread Harper achieved some notoriety for being the first to put all of the clues together. The Des Moines Register reported that Harper had been paid for interviews in several states and that WLS-TV in Chicago had even chartered a private plane for him so that he could appear on their morning talk show. And he didn't even own any of the Beatles' albums![2] "It was just a joke," he said. "I was the first one to put it all together. I knew when I wrote the story that it wasn't true."Perhaps the article that did the most to propel the "Paul is dead" rumor was one written by a University of Michigan student named Frad LaBour. LaBour's article appeared in the October 14, 1969, edition of the Michigan Daily, the University of Michigan's newspaper, just two days after Tom's call to Russ Gibb. Set with the task of writing a review of Abbey Road, LaBour wrote a tongue-in-cheek obituary of the Beatles. Even though it was not the first article about Paul's rumored death, LaBour's article in the was important because it fleshed out several aspects of the story. Many of the elements of the rumor that have been repeated countless times were products of LaBour's imagination. He created the identity of Paul's replacement, William Campbell, and he asserted the walrus was an image of death, stating "'Walrus' is greek for corpse.” |
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 9:57:21 GMT -5
Here is a piece written by "Tom", the very first caller to Russell Gibb at the radio station WKNR. www.keener13.com/zarski.htmNo leak here. |
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Oct 22, 2004 13:33:22 GMT -5
Clues alone would have never been enough to convince me Paul was dead. It's the PHYSICAL evidence, i.e. the head shape, the eye distance, the nose, the height, the singing voice, etc. that opened my eyes. Like many on this board, I was a Beatles' fan for years and never believed Paul was dead. Now that I have seen enough physical evidence, the clues actually make sense now and I know why Lennon and everyone left so many.
|
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 14:04:51 GMT -5
Clues alone would have never been enough to convince me Paul was dead. It's the PHYSICAL evidence, i.e. the head shape, the eye distance, the nose, the height, the singing voice, etc. that opened my eyes. Like many on this board, I was a Beatles' fan for years and never believed Paul was dead. Now that I have seen enough physical evidence, the clues actually make sense now and I know why Lennon and everyone left so many. Did you not see? The "clues" were made up. Lennon didn't leave any. It was concocted by these people in the mid-west. They are real people. They admitted it was a joke, a fraud. This thread questioned the cover-up and how nothing leaked out, not about photo comparisons. My whole point was that if Lennon wanted to get this information out, he could have done it quickly, directly with more detail and documentation that could have been verified. Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there was a program called the Wild, Wild West. James West would usually get caught by the bad guys who would naturally want to kill him. But to do so, they would always come up with some elaborate plan to slowly do away with him. It would involve something like a record playing a song, and when the record finished the arm would pull a string that would light a match which would then swing over and light a fuse to a rocket that West was tied to. The rocket was supposed to light and send him shooting out a window over some cliff. It would take so long, he naturally had time to escape. I always thought it was crazy. Why all these crazy elaborate plans; why not just shoot the guy between the eyes and be done with it. This cover-up and "clues" foolishness are like the plans in the Wild, Wild West. Overly elaborate, complicated and melodramatic. Why go through all the trouble of doing these clues when the direct approach would be so much more efficient getting more bang for the buck at the same time being less risky. Especially when the replacement, who was benefiting so much from imitating paul, would have had to be involved in ratting on himself. |
|
|
|
Post by Morph on Oct 22, 2004 14:46:01 GMT -5
Clues alone would have never been enough to convince me Paul was dead. It's the PHYSICAL evidence, i.e. the head shape, the eye distance, the nose, the height, the singing voice, etc. that opened my eyes. Like many on this board, I was a Beatles' fan for years and never believed Paul was dead. Now that I have seen enough physical evidence, the clues actually make sense now and I know why Lennon and everyone left so many. ++ |
|
|
|
Post by Morph on Oct 22, 2004 14:48:38 GMT -5
This thread questioned the cover-up and how nothing leaked out, not about photo comparisons. So what people tell me outweighs what I see and hear. Anyway, I thought the premise of the thread was "how" this could have been accomplished...consider it an opportunity for speculation. |
|
|
|
Post by Goldfinger on Oct 22, 2004 15:35:30 GMT -5
So what people tell me outweighs what I see and hear. Anyway, I thought the premise of the thread was "how" this could have been accomplished...consider it an opportunity for speculation. They have ears but can not hear. I did a lot of research on PID before I found 60IF. The thing that intrigued me most about 60IF is that it was based on a document giving detailed information as to what happened and it had the photo comparisons. It was not based on the silly clues. You are right, the topic was about how this could be accomplished, it was not about photo or voice comparisons. I addressed the issue of how they could keep all these people quiet for 40 years. In other words, I dealt with the likelyhood that the details would be leaked and how they would have been leaked. I was not dealing in any way with photo and voice comparisons. And yes, when the people originally involved with the PID story that came out in the fall of 1969 admit to making up the clues and that they knew the story was false, I will certainly give that more credence than I would feelings of people who had nothing to do with it. No matter what the photo or voice evidence shows, it does not validate these "clues" and does not prove that Lennon put them there. I mean if these guys made up the clue about the walrus being a symbol of death in 1969, why would John use it as a clue in 1967? Why would the replacement, who is part of the cover-up, who is benefiting financiallly, and the other beatles resent agree to participate in putting clues on album covers showing him to be a fraud? It makes no sense. |
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Oct 22, 2004 16:26:21 GMT -5
Yes I saw. I've seen it before. Practically ALL of us has seen it before. Lennon denied the clues publicly. The people who believe the clues were made up, not there and/or a publicity stunt, well, some of them have come forward as in the case with Tom Zarski. Let me tell you if Tom Zarski didn't discover the clues someone else surely would have. The people who believe the clues are real and left by Lennon, namely us on this board and others, you would never hear their opinion voiced anywhere on any news publication, etc., etc. How can you not see the MANY clues that are there? This goes WAY beyond coincidence my friend. Who would have believed it was really Lennon without him stating it publicly? If he stated it publicly he could lose his life. And you wanna know something? Your whole idea of Lennon sending a letter to news agencies, etc. to tell the whole story would be just another "clue" in this day because noone would have believed it back then or today and YOU would be denying it yourself to this day. |
|
|
|
Post by revolver on Oct 22, 2004 17:34:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Oct 22, 2004 19:07:35 GMT -5
Clues alone would have never been enough to convince me Paul was dead. It's the PHYSICAL evidence, i.e. the head shape, the eye distance, the nose, the height, the singing voice, etc. that opened my eyes. Like many on this board, I was a Beatles' fan for years and never believed Paul was dead. Now that I have seen enough physical evidence, the clues actually make sense now and I know why Lennon and everyone left so many. Can you show me a fade where the eyes and head shape don't match? |
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Oct 22, 2004 19:17:57 GMT -5
Can you show me a fade where the eyes and head shape don't match? I would if I knew how to do fades.  However, if you post a fade of Paul and Faul, I can show you where they don't match up as I have seen all of your fades.  |
|
|
|
Post by FlamingPie on Oct 22, 2004 19:39:01 GMT -5
I would if I knew how to do fades. However, if you post a fade of Paul and Faul, I can show you where they don't match up as I have seen all of your fades. It can be anyone's fade, not yours. Okay, here's Larry's fade of my comparison:  |
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Oct 22, 2004 20:21:19 GMT -5
So what people tell me outweighs what I see and hear. Anyway, I thought the premise of the thread was "how" this could have been accomplished...consider it an opportunity for speculation. Ya well, that's the big question isn't it? I'm very certain that it did indeed happen, but I wouldn't have a clue. THAT's why they call it a "mystery"! |
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Oct 22, 2004 20:26:41 GMT -5
Clues alone would have never been enough to convince me Paul was dead. It's the PHYSICAL evidence, i.e. the head shape, the eye distance, the nose, the height, the singing voice, etc. that opened my eyes. Like many on this board, I was a Beatles' fan for years and never believed Paul was dead. Now that I have seen enough physical evidence, the clues actually make sense now and I know why Lennon and everyone left so many. Exactly... the clues aren't that important. Back in 69, I didn't think much about it, other than thinking it was just a fun little game... sort of a bonus to the actual music. The idea of PID never clicked with me at all. And all the clues still don't have much, if any weight in my being solidly PID/PWR. |
|
|
|
Post by eyesbleed on Oct 22, 2004 20:30:37 GMT -5
Did you not see? The "clues" were made up. Lennon didn't leave any. . So there are NO clues in Rev9? They were put there by somebody else I suppose? NONE of his lyrics are clue worthy? Forget it I give up. |
|
|
|
Post by -Wings- on Oct 23, 2004 1:22:21 GMT -5
How did they do it (if it happened, of course)? All I have our my own theories, but of course being that they're theories they don't have much to back them up.
I'm pretty sure this was beyond John, George, Ringo, George Martin, Brian, and the rest. This coverup would have had to have been orchestrated by the government (not the Illuminati or anything egg-suckingly retarded like that). I remember there was an article posted somewhere on this board about how The Beatles were the most profitable export of Britian. There's no denying how huge they were (even today, no band has come close to matching Beatlemania). So there would be the reason they would want to keep Paul (the 'cute one' and arguably the most popular of the four at the time) alive.
If Paul died in a car accident, I'm sure that after the initial rescue crews came, it could have been prevented from getting any further. They wouldn't take the body to the morgue, as I'm sure they would want to keep his death hush hush even before they had a plan to replace him. I could see them burying Paul somewhere secret, or maybe even cremating him.
Now, when it comes to replacing him, perhaps they sold everybody on the idea (even if they would never be really happy about it) that it was for the greater good, and even if Paul was tragically taken too soon, he could be kept alive for just a few more precious years (I doubt it was ever intended to have carried on past the end of the band). The torment of replacing their friend was evident in the very first post-Revolver Beatles song, Strawberry Fields, so I doubt they were ever gung-ho about it.
When Faul stepped in, he was protected by Mel Evans, who practically never left his side through the autumn of '66 through the winter of '67 (even moving in with him). They also seemed to cut some arbituary ties, like Paul's cleaning people. They only let the people in on it that had to know, and they may have been intimidated to keep quiet.
Yeah, I know this part of the whole PWR thing is the hardest to believe. It's why I keep alternating between being a true believer and having doubts. There's one thing I'm sure of though. Something really hinky was going on in late 1966 in the world of Paul McCartney.
|
|
